| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/01/2012 11:58:48 AM · #1 |
I have a print that I am making in limited quantities. I have 2 in each size 4X6, 8X10, 12X18. I have numbered each size 1/2 and 2/2 respectively for each size.
I have a questions:
1. Do you destroy all digital files so that there can be no mistake of reprinting the images again or keep it anyway? I want to stay true to my word that these are limited edition and that they are the only ones that will ever be printed.
Any other suggestions on limited edition prints are welcome |
|
|
|
01/01/2012 04:02:27 PM · #2 |
| sign and number by hand, that way you can still use the image for other mediums, just now your prints are limited. |
|
|
|
01/01/2012 04:38:18 PM · #3 |
Not sure what you use to manage images... but how about tagging/keywording them with something that shows in different collections (LR specific) or move the orig to different locations. In LR and others you could colour them different say.
I would not want to delete the orig but that is certainly an option after the last print I guess. Did you agree to never use for a non print thing? If not then your going to want to keep anyway. |
|
|
|
01/01/2012 04:45:52 PM · #4 |
I NEVER destroy an original photo, regardless of limited printing or not.
Of course I don't limit my prints, I enjoy selling as many as possible and continue to bring in revenue from them.
|
|
|
|
01/01/2012 07:52:17 PM · #5 |
I save all my files in folders by year--> month-->date and description of shoot. In this file it says the date and limited edition printing so I can easily distinguish. So I'm good there. Was just wanted to get a feel for what others do as I have not done this before.
Matt - I did a limited edition because I have had some customer's ask if I had any limited edition prints. I did have one of Chichen Itza that I took while on vacation and decided to make it a limited printing. He bought it on the spot only because it was limited. So I decided to do a limited run of one image and double the price for it. We'll see if I have to discount it before the year is up to get rid of it :) LOL |
|
|
|
01/01/2012 09:31:14 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by MattO:
I NEVER destroy an original photo, regardless of limited printing or not.
Of course I don't limit my prints, I enjoy selling as many as possible and continue to bring in revenue from them. |
In the digital age it is unlikely that every single copy of the image (data) will ever be totally destroyed anyway -- it is likely to be backed up on some drive or disc somewhere.
I think limited editions are also pretty meaningless when I don't make my own prints, and if people order through my DPC Prints gallery I never even see the print. It's not like there's any variability like in the old days of printing on an enlarger, and dodging and burning the prints "on the fly" ... I just ran off 500 identical prints for someone to use as promotional bookmarks. |
|
|
|
01/01/2012 09:39:52 PM · #7 |
I think that the idea of limited editions still has merit, at least from a buyer's standpoint. I think this is true, even given the digital nature of printing, meaning essentially identical prints can be produced at will. If each print is hand-numbered, that is what makes them unique, and places them in their order in the edition. IMO, it doesn't matter whether you keep the file, or even whether there might exist one or a very few other prints, e.g. hanging in your own space. What matters is that only that number have been sold. It is this which affects the potential for increased value over time, which is why folks will pay more for a limited edition than for an open edition, and more for an edition of, say, 50 than an edition of 1000.
From an artist's perspective, I'm not so sure of the ultimate value of limited editions, unless you are at least relatively well known, and can command high prices for your limited editions.
|
|
|
|
01/02/2012 07:02:45 AM · #8 |
I've became very interested in this subject in a couple of month ago and I did some investigatin around this, allthough I don't have any conclusions yet.
I was in a photo exibition where a photog (he wasn't a "pro") was invited by a printing lab to show some of this work in a special printing medium he used to print his photos to sell and the lab wanted to promote. This was a Digigraphie printing with Diasec framing process. The digigraphie (//www.digigraphie.com/layout/index.php) is a high quality printing process patented by Epson and only "special" labs that can match hteir quality control are certifieds. And as far as I understood they only print and cetify limited editions fine art photos (and other printed art forms). The Diasec is a special mounting technique that mounts the digigraphie printing in a aluminium plate and put a special kind of anti glare glass in the front that is UV potected and preserves the image. I readed that this was one of the few printing processes that the Louvre museum and some top art galleries will acept.
When you use the Digigraphie process you need to state how many copies you allow and the size of the copies. if you will print in more than one size it is considered another serie, not the same photo in other size.
you will receive a signed certification of longevity and originality stating the number of the copy for each printing you order.
This is a very expensive process. The photog from the sow was printing in 150x100cm. One print like this in digigraphie and Diasec mounting would cost around 350 USD and he was selling the limited editions for around 1300 USD.
I think that this make sense for high end art work and fine art photography, but it's dificult to sell for these prices. I would love to do an exibition with 12 or 16 photos printed in this process but the cost is phohibitive, and I don't know if I would sell any image.
regarding the files I don't think you should destroy or erase them. But you cannot sell the images for anything else. I think you can still have them in your website or portfolio or show them online as you work but you cannot comercialize them for any other purpose.
just my thoughts.
|
|
|
|
01/02/2012 09:58:57 AM · #9 |
My wife and I operate a gallery, Alpenglow Images & Accents, in Estes Park, CO. We earn our living from the sale of my photography. Supplementing that income, we also sell jewelry, fine crystal, antiques, home design accents and other types of art from about 20 consignment accounts. About 4 million visitors come annually to our area to visit Rocky Mountain National Park. My market niche is selling large photographs of landscape and wildlife to the locals and visitors from the place they (and we) truly love.
I only sell limited edition, signed prints. Usually, my editions are about 200 prints. But, it varies between 100 and 500, based on our estimate of sales from a particular image. Always, by the time we've sold out the number of prints from an edition, I will have captured a different, better, more interesting, more sophisticated image to take its place. We keep track of the numbers, but we only print a few prints at a time. About 1/3 of the photos we sell are printed by me. Another third by CanvasOnDemand. And, the final third by Shutterfly or Meridian Pro. So, as we number prints, they are sequentially ordered regardless of size. And, the size in an edition run can vary from 8x10 to 50x75.
Does it matter? Absolutely .... for our business. The numbered prints with signature applied add perceived value. I think it creates an idea in the customer's head that what they are buying is unique and special. We are able to support a premium price on my photography vs. generic, mass-produced runs at competing outlets.
Just a footnote: Another photographer in town decided to mass produce a few of his photos in a quantity of 5000. Last I heard, his run was still in storage with a price point way above the market.
|
|
|
|
01/02/2012 09:59:22 AM · #10 |
sorry, dup post
Message edited by author 2012-01-02 09:59:43. |
|
|
|
01/02/2012 01:08:53 PM · #11 |
| I have never sold a print as a limited edition, but I've given it some thought. One of the ideas I like is to destroy the .PSD file after printing. This would force you to reprocess which likely adds subtle differences to prints. The idea came to me when hearing about Ansel's techniques and the fact that so much of his art came in the darkroom that it is unlikely he could reproduce things exactly each time. I've heard of "good prints" of his that were particularly sought after because of some quality it possessed. |
|
|
|
01/02/2012 01:14:48 PM · #12 |
| Whenever I create a limited edition I sign each one in my blood. That is the only way to create verifiable originals in photography. |
|
|
|
01/02/2012 01:25:45 PM · #13 |
|
|
|
01/02/2012 01:36:40 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Whenever I create a limited edition I sign each one in my blood. That is the only way to create verifiable originals in photography. |
ooh then you can sell your DNA profile for like 50 bucks later on down the road so they have proof that blood is indeed yours hahahahaha |
|
|
|
01/02/2012 01:39:43 PM · #15 |
| These are the pens I use. |
|
|
|
01/02/2012 02:26:52 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by SEG:
These are the pens I use. |
Those are great pens. I use them for drawing. But these are the pens I use for signing original prints. |
|
|
|
01/02/2012 03:00:07 PM · #17 |
I know a professional photographer who has had his own galleries; his recommendation is akin to Nuno's, that a limited edition be made for one size, and then another and another if so desired. As well he recommends signing, in pencil, on a thin unprinted margin at the bottom of the photograph, which will show just above the matting: your name/signature on the left, title and date on the right. A nice conservative suggestion.
When I get around to it, I might just make some chew marks. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/29/2025 07:12:19 PM EDT.
